About your Search

20121202
20121210
STATION
MSNBCW 27
CNNW 10
MSNBC 4
KQEH (PBS) 3
CNBC 2
CSPAN 2
CNN 1
CSPAN2 1
FBC 1
KCSM (PBS) 1
KGO (ABC) 1
WETA 1
WHUT (Howard University Television) 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 66
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 66 (some duplicates have been removed)
. and then this party that paraded around as the big deficit hawks, the guys that wanted to control spending, the only cuts they put on the table is playing at margins, increasing retirement age from 65 to 67 and adjusting rates for social security. this hasn't presented itself as a party that wants to cut spending. on one hand you have president obama's proposal, which most agree is the responsible way of raising the debt, raising rates. and responsible cuts on entitlements and discretionary spending versus republicans who are divided against something that is a chicken hawk when it comes to the deficits, that is the boehner approach, or the more extremist position which is absolutely nothing.ç so this is an extraordinary position for the republican party to have evolved into. >> you must respond to what julian just said. >> i like julian an awful lot but i think what he said is entirely wrong. it's fascinating president obama last july, july of 2011, said we can get $1.2 trillion in revenue where we don't have to raise marginal tax rates and close loopholes and julian says most economists agree, i
. [ screaming ] oh grover! electric deficit boogaloo. 29 minutes after the hour. right back on "the stephanie miller show." >> wow! i've never seen anything like this. >> when disaster strikes sometimes the only way out is to look within. current tv digs deep into the determination and escape. "trapped" experience the drama. back to back to back. >> hold on mates! >> catch the "trapped" mini-marathon saturday starting at 1 eastern. on current tv. rich, chewy caramel rolled up in smooth milk chocolate. don't forget about that payroll meeting. rolo.get your smooth on. also in minis. get irresistibly clean and fresh carpets in your home with resolve deep clean powder. the moist powder removes three times more dirt than vacuuming alone while neutralizing odors for a clean you can see, smell and really enjoy. don't just vacuum clean. resolve clean. [ singing christmas carols in background ] aunt sally's singing again. it's a tradition honey. [ singing christmas carols ] mmmm. [ female announcer ] make new traditions with pillsbury grands! cinnamon rolls. [ f
. tea party 2, the sequel. [ screaming ] oh grover! electric deficit boogaloo. 29 minutes after the hour. right back on "the stephanie miller show." alright, in 15 minutes we're going to do the young turks. i think the number one thing that viewers like about the young turks is that we're honest. they know that i'm not bs'ing them with some hidden agenda, actually supporting one party or the other. when the democrats are wrong, they know that i'm going to be the first one to call them out. they can question whether i'm right, but i think that the audience gets that this guy, to the best of his ability, is trying to look out for us. [ male announcer ] red lobster's crabfest ends soon. hurry in and try five succulent entrees like our tender snow crab paired with savory garlic shrimp. just $12.99. come into red lobster and sea food differently. and introducing 7 lunch choices for just $7.99. salads, sandwiches, and more. rich, chewy caramel rolled up in smooth milk chocolate. don't forget about that payroll meeting. rolo.get your smooth
to reduce the deficit, 63% said no. 86% of the ads run for obama were personal attacks on romney. he won a stunning mandate to not be romney. he did not run on the basis he was going to do massive new spending and the kind of tax increases, $1.6 trillion that he's now talking about. and at the same time that obama was elected president, the republican house, which had twice voted for a real budget -- remember, the president's budget he claims he has a mandate for was put up before the house and the democrats all voted against it. in the senate, the democrats didn't want to have anything to do with it. it's a little hard to argue, he had a mandate for something the rest of his party ran away from. >> well -- >> did not run ads on those issues. >> and, of course, it was a bit more complicated than that. but to your point about the exit polls, it's true, most people said that they didn't want tax increases to solve the deficit. what they said -- the majority, was they wanted both balanced. they wanted cuts and tax increases. which is what both john boehner and the president -- in very strid
. let me give you an example, all right? is deficit reduction a serious issue? it is. i'm in the middle of that debate right now. but you know what is a more serious issue according to the american people? the need to create millions and millions of jobs. now how often are you turning on tv and saying, "hey, we're in the middle of a terrible recession. it is, we have 15% real unemployment or underemployment in america. we've got to create millions of jobs." that's what working people are saying, but the big money interests are saying, "oh, we've got to cut social security. we've got to cut medicare. we've got to cut medicaid." there is no other option. so i give you that just as an example of how corporate media throws out one set of ideas, where the american people are thinking that jobs are probably more important. >> it has probably not escaped your attention that the mantra "fiscal cliff, fiscal cliff, fiscal cliff" is played out every night on the evening news and the corporate news. what does that say to you? that you'd get "fiscal cliff, fiscal cliff," but not "job crisis, job cr
is to go over the fiscal cliff. it maximizing the deficit reduction. there's no deal cut between republicans and democrats. it's not going to reduce the amount of money coming out of the deficit by a lot. so if you do that, you go back to the clinton tax rates, cut some defense and we have a short, mild recession for two quarters. we have to get serious about the deficit e. i have no belief that the congress is going to get serious about the deficit. so tom cole was right because he wants to get the republicans back in the mainstream. but the best thing the country could do is go over the cliff. >> timothy geithner doesn't agree with you on that. >> he may or may not. but i looked at this a lot of ways. the people inside washington are awfully smart and awfully out of touch. we need to do something about the deficit. going over the fiscal cliff is the best thing we're going to get out of washington in terms of serious production to the deficit. we will suffer, but we got ourselves into this. we're not going to get out without some pain. i think we are going to go over the cliff.
intervention to curb the deficit. it has been astronomical. then i heard barack obama say the way we are going to do it is by making more cuts in various ways. he was saying by making more cuts and the only people it is going to hurt is the working class and somewhat of the middle-class. he should mention the fact that out of control spending has a lot to do with the credit card crunch. specifically because of the middle-class. i think if we get those tax cuts centered with them, i do not think the poll would be affected. you have these small companies that are developing, and he is saying have those small companies hire more people and get them involved, but come consumer expenditures. that is partially i think a solution. host: you are calling on the republican line and you think hillary clinton would make a good candidate. would you vote for her in 2016? caller: i think she would be a very vital aspect to the political process. as far as her running for president, 2016 -- god knows what may happen from this point to that point. as far as her role as a democrat, i think by working along with
times." so far in fiscal year 2013, the government notching up a $172 billion deficit in november a lawn. jams is joining us from orlando, florida on the democrats' line. caller: i think the number one priority is the people, and i think he will do a good job. people should give him more credit and let him do what he is doing. it will take time. i think he has a lot on his hands to deal with now. host: if you get through, turn the volume down on the tv set. this is from "to the new york times." our question -- what should be the president's number one agenda. next up is christine from new york city on the independent line. caller: good morning. i believe the president will not be able to accomplish his agenda without doing something that i believe is supported by the majority of the american people, that is the critical need for campaign finance reform to restore us to democracy that the people are represented at intergovernment instead of special interests. if we got campaign finance reform enacted, i know john mccain wanted it and a lot of other people -- we could then move on to do wh
simpson shared the deficit reduction commission a couple of years ago. they are both in town trying to pound a sense at into elected leaders. evan thomas has been out of town promoting his book, "ike's bluff." terrific christmas present. >> thank you. >> as i recall, we were having the same composition we are having now. >> like groundhog day. talk about bluffing -- they will be complete unreasonable until the last second where they agreed. while they are bluffing, we could go over the cliff. >> where are we headed, mark? >> one side says that raising tax rates is an example, the other side says we will not balance the budget on the backs of students and seniors without asking those who make as much as i do not to pay another diamond. we are in the chest thumping a stage of this negotiation. we are interested in the product rather than the process. the process does the fact of the product and you don't want hostilities to make the final product unreachable. >> nina, there were a bunch of c.l.'s in town saying please do something so we can plan for our future. >> the difference betwe
they erase the trust deficit, every time they do it, they make it harder to do the big stuff. >> ken, notwithstanding the problems whef outlined in this conversation and the problems coming from washington, there is some economic renaissance going on. we've got low energy prices, manufacturing input. this housing boom with more interest rating here to stay for a couple of years. is there enough that can happen in this economy to off set what's happening? >> we can't ignore them. i wish i could say that. if they blow it, there's nothing we can do, but i think the risks are becoming more balanced where things like the housing recov recovery, consumer debt coming down are start tog offer the possibility where growth might be a little stronger. although on the other hand, the europe and many things you mentioned, all these uncertainty mentioned it could be lower. we're less vulnerable than we were, but if they don't strike a deal, i think they will, they may go over january 1st so the republicans can say taxes went up even though they give in on the tax hikes for the 2%. >> stay where yo
play special interest dig in. until they erase the trust deficit, every time they do it incrementally they make it harder to do the big stuff. >> notwithstanding the problems in this conversation and notwithstanding problems from washington, there is some economic renaissance that's brewing under the surface here. we have an energy boom going on, low energy prices. we have manufacturing output increasing in this country. we have the housing boom with low interest rates to stay for a couple of yearses. is there enough that could happen that could offset what's going on in washington? can we grow our way out of this? >> we can't ignore them. if they blow it, there is nothing we can do. the risks are becoming more balanced where things like the housing recovery, consumer debt coming down are starting to offer the possibility where growth might be stronger although it could be lower. it's more balanced. i think they will strike a deal. they may go after january 1 so the republicans can say taxes went up. now we're cutting taxes though they give in on the tax cuts for the 2%. >> stay where
and supporting unspecified r revenue hikes to help cut the deficit. and big business resigned to higher taxes. here is lloyd blankfein. >> we had to lift up the marginal rate. >> norquist's response? >> some of these people have had impure thoughts. no one pulled the trigger and voted for a tax increase. >> to be sure, norquist is still raking in big bucks. according to open secrets.org, he shelled out almost $14 million to defeat democratic opponents in this past election cycle. >> we've run ads to let people know who has taken the pledge and who hasn't. we'll do phones into letting people know who is taking the pledge. >> norquist's big backers are republican operatives, cross roads gps, the super pac led by kingpin karl rove and the center to protect patient rights. closely tied to the ultra conservative cook brothers. they account for a majority of the budget and there's no sign that they're running scared. norquist truly believes that the best way to grow the economy is to tame big government. he told me recently he will be vindicated no matter how many politicians break the pledge. what
for the american people that extends tax cuts to the american people. brings our long-term deficits down. tough spending savings is part of that, and invest in things that matter to the american economy, like infrastructure, and getting americans back to work. we think we can do that. we have a good chance, and it's very important. and i think we'll get there, david. >> do you think we'll get a deal by the end of the year? >> i do. because the only thing standing in the way of that is a refusal by republicans to accept that rates have to go up on the wealthiest americans. and i don't really see them doing that. >> the idea that they have signalled something significant for them, which is -- >> what is that? >> putting revenue on the table. >> it's welcome that they are recognizing that revenues are going to have to go up. but they haven't told us anything about how far rates should go up, how far revenues should go up, who should pay higher taxes. >> republicans have said that no republicans will vote for a tax rate increase. do you think they are just bluffing? >> i can't tell you what they ar
in washington negotiate a bad deal on the bucket and deficit, what do you think will happen to medicare and medicaid benefits. >> it stars two senator and two republican reps. cnn reports the labor unions are spending more than a half of million dollars on this round of spots. we're back with more steph after the break. stay with us. ♪ going to do the young turks. i think the number one thing that viewers like about the young turks is that we're honest. they know that i'm not bs'ing them with some hidden agenda, actually supporting one party or the other. when the democrats are wrong, they know that i'm going to be the first one to call them out. they can question whether i'm right, but i think that the audience gets that this guy, to the best of his ability, is trying to look out for us. [♪ theme music ♪] >> stephanie: okay. and as we mentioned, unemployment numbers. hello! [ ♪ patriotic music ♪ ] >> stephanie: the lowest in four years. >> wow! >> stephanie: it has dropped to 7.7%. >> you're welcome america, i did that. >> no, you didn't. >> stephanie: right. [ applause
overwhelming the deficit story was at that point. you know, you look at that administration. the coming in, just no one thought they could do anything. it's not unlike the conversations we're having now. and they went in, they did the deal, president bush had to shift from read my lips to as only he could put it, read my hips. and it was good for the country, it created a political dynamic that cost president bush the election in 1992, and which we're still living, because that gave us grover norquist, et cetera. >> let's get to grover norquist in a minute, but i do have a question. the gop plan consists of $2.2 trillion in savings over a decade. that includes raging the eligibility age for medicare from 65 to 67. and lowering cost of living increases for social security benefits. they also propose overhauling the tax code to generate $800 billion in new revenue. but without raising taxes on the wealthy. in a letter to the president, leading republicans compared their plan to one erskine bowles drew up last year. >> not even close. >> he rejected that connection and the white house, of cou
the l.a. times. fiscal cliff let's take the plunge in the l.a. times. he said the u.s. deficit and debt will fall, social security will go on unharmed and we'll go back to tax rates that were better than the current ones. what do you think? >> i certainly don't want something that will put us into a recession. that's more republican thinking. but i think ultimately pugh has a pole saying 53% of the american people will blame republicans, to which i can only imagine republicans saying, oh we're finally ahead in a poll. boner is like a slug there is a bright orange trail of cheat toe dust and bronzer leading from his office. >> stephanie: okay. here you go. >> so many people are going to part-time work and being hurt. everyone i know is already seeing cutbacks, and the economy is going to be disastrous and only going to get worse under obama. >> stephanie: by the way that was dexter von frisch? >> it was. >> stephanie: he just screams at ann coulters voice? >> it's like an earthquake he just screams before it happens. >> stephanie: kids carbonite backs up everyt
deficit and debt. so this, this legislation both accomplishes that goal and still provides an increase in diversity which is what the senator from new york was talking about. and then an additional point is the point that the senator from texas so very clearly made. this legislation passed the house. last time i checked, legislation has to pass the senate and the house. that's a pretty important distinction. going back to the comments of the senator from kentucky. he said hey, if we can't do it all at once because of disagreements, let's start getting done what we can get done. so here is a bill that provides us with -- with people who can help our economy grow, people in the sciences and technology fields that we very much need. it will increase diversity just as the senator from new york said, and it's passed the house. common sense says let's go. let's pass the bill. so we very much want to join with the senator from new york and the senator from delaware and the other sponsors that he referred to, but let's join on something that can actually get done, meaning a bill that passes th
benefits to help reduce the other deficits. >> to be clear that's one thing that's clearly off the table. social security is off the tables in these negotiations. >> in a separate process to strengthen social security not as a process to reduce the deficit. >>> on the issues of taxes, is there any flexibility on the president's position? does it have to go all the way back to the tax rates on the wealthy to the clinton levels? >> again, george, we think the best way to do this is to have those tax rates go back to where and one of the best, at one of the most prosperous times in recent american history to combine that reforms that limit reductions for 2%, i'm deeply skeptical about ways to get through this without that mix of rates and reforms. >> and if congress doesn't agree, you're comfortable going over that cliff on january 1st? >> there's no reason why 98% of americans have to see their taxes go up because some members of congress on the republican side want to block tax rate increase for 2% of the wealthy americans. remember, those tax cuts cost a trillion dollars over ten years.
, but not as part of the process to reduce the deficit the country faces. >> there's a notion some republicans are for lack of a better word salivating at a possible it divide where you have some democrats who want no movement on entitlements and if there's any heat to be taken, it to come from the gop or go to the gop. >> let me just say a couple of things. first of all, what geithner was referring to is that social security shouldn't be on the table right now because it's not a driver of the deficit we're dealing with right now. he's referring to a separate process next year. what the republicans have asked for previously and i hope they're not going to continue to ask for is essentially the dismantling of medicare. we debated it during the presidential with paul ryan's proposal to put -- turn medicare into a voucher system. so when it comes to looking for savings in medicare, there's ways to find savings without breaking the guarantee that we've had to our seniors for the last several decades. i think democrats, again, have demonstrated repeatedly that we're willing to compromise, but the r
and then these will be the numbers that the committees on capitol hill work towards in terms of having sizable deficit reduction. >> here is the problem, luke. how is it possible that speaker boehner puts on the table $150 billion less than he considered conceding during the grand bargain negotiations? did the last year not happen? >> reporter: what you're seeing here is a proposal by speaker boehner with the $800 billion in revenue which is where they were during -- >> you're trying to stifle yourself from laughing, luke. >> reporter: i'm not. i think one interesting points here in terms of the letter is that the first line is, dear mr. president, after a status quo election, and if you talk to folks at the white house, they don't view it as a status quo election. they thought what they had was a huge victory, and they are just -- if you're flying at 35,000 feet, you see the difference between both of them here is babe e boehner is like our margins in the house, you know, we still have a sense of clout. democrats are saying we increased our clout. this offer is meant by boehner to say the first one from geithn
revenue. as i've indicated, the only way to get the kind of revenue for a balanced deficit reduction plan is to make sure that we're also modestly increasing rates for people who can afford it. folks like me. just to be clear, i'm not going to sign any package that somehow prevents the top rate from going up for folks at the top 2%. >> the concerted effort from the white house is very clear. here's white house press secretary jay carney. >> what will produce a deal is an acknowledgement by republicans, republican leaders, that rates on the top 2%, the wealthiest americans, have to rise. there is no deal without that acknowledgement, and without a concrete, mathematically sound proposal -- >> but speaker boehner still insists he can get the revenue without raising rates? >> now, the revenues we're putting on the table are going to come from guess who? the rich. there are ways to limit deductions, close loopholes, and have the same people pay more of their money to the federal government without raising tax rates, which we believe will harm our economy. >> some conservatives just can't stan
in the yearly deficit and not even a chip of a cent off the debt. he said he would rather go over the fiscal cliff than not to raise tax rates. so obama pushing higher taxes on the top 2%, not for economic reasons but for i'd logical reasons but there is also this obvious fact. obama wants to raise the top rates for political reasons. now that is he wants to force republicans to raise tacks in order to trigger a civil war within the gop and the conservative movement, and in that respect sadly obama is having some success. now so long as this debate is focused not on cutting spending but on raising daxs and revenues with the only question being which taxes, how much revenue, then obama wins. now if obama succeeds in making the argument not about his spending, but about grover norquist, he wins there, too. for republicans, on the other hand, if they can figure out a way to refocus the debate on spending, they win and the country wins. we can't kid ourselves that's correct is not easy to do. obama has the biggest microphone in the land and he also has the media in his hip pocket. all the gop ha
achieved, but not meaningful debt or deficit reduction, no reform to entitlements, and i don't think there's tax reform. there's a deal in form, but i think there's more to get done. >> are we done? >> ask another if you want. >> do they really have to raise taxes? people accepted that's the outcome. >> i think that they need to raise revenue. how they do it, whether it's some tax increases or some limiting of deductions, but it shouldn't be hard to bridge a gap that's wider and wider. >> a matter of what it looks like, a given at this point. >> i think it is. >> higher taxes are coming. doug, thank you. ask as many questions as you want. >> you're generous with your time. >> that's what dagen does when she's here. >> she would be huck -- heckling you for your bad voice today. the supposed middleman in the debt negotiations throwing fire on the talks this week by saying nothing will get done unless republicans agree to raise tax rates on the rich. >> there you go. rich edson in dc with the latest on that. hey, rich. >> congressional republicans say the latest fiscal cliff shrugged off the
put together a plan to move us towards some kind of deficit reduction package eventually evolved into the simpson-bowles commission plan. but the point i was making and i think the speaker is making is republicans have not come out here with some hardball, crazy off-the-table negotiation. what they have done is put something that bill clinton's former chief of staff at one time odd voe indicated for. and i think in the end that reflects that we are moving toward the potential compromise deal. >> he said -- >> i think i'm inappropriately in the middle here. i ought to be over there on the left. what bowles said yesterday was i was testifying before congress, and i described that as a midpoint between what republicans want and what democrats wanted. it was not what i would recommend. but i don't think that's even relevant. >> -- circumstances have changed since then. >> i don't even think that's relevant. i think the real question here and i think ron's right about this is are tax rates going to go up? yes, they're going to go up, because republicans are not going to have to vote f
leaders. governors are concerned about the impact of deficit reduction measures on their state budgebu. the latest gop offer would overhaul the tax code, raise $800 billion in new revenue but seek $600 billion in health savings, net savings add up to about $2.2 trillion over ten years. boehner called the white house's original offer la la land and it does appear that even though at one point bowles endorsed a blueprint like this, he's trying to distance himself from it right now. >> the president got re-elected. he's claiming he got re-elected in part because he wants to tax that 2%. he cannot go back on that. in the meantime, congress most of the republicans signed the grover norquist pledge which says you cannot tax that 2% more than anybody else. you can't increase the taxes. so we're at a stalemate and someone has to give and i don't see anyone giving right now. >> bank of america today commented on the let's jump crowd. the bungee jump crowd for which they think is a scenario. >> you wonder how much of that is in negotiating position. embraced early on by senator schumer, new york
're serious about reducing our deficit while still investing in things like education and research that are important to growing our economy, and if we're serious about protecting middle-class families, then we're also going to have to ask the wealthiest americans to pay higher tax rates. that's one principle i won't compromise on. >> meanwhile, on the other side of the aisle, republican senator marco rubio gave the weekly republican address today. part of his message? the tax rate should not go up on anyone including the top 2%. >> we must reform our complicated, uncertain, job-killing tax code by getting rid of unjustified loopholes. but our goal should be to generate new revenue by creating new taxpayers, not new taxes. >> joining me, author of "the escape artists: how obama's team fumbled the recovery." david nakamura is with us, as well, from "the washington post." good to see you. what's your read on this, first of all, both sides publicly giving the impression they are sticking to their guns? >> yeah. i think in the past week you've seen some movement in the gop, some acknow
anything on entitlements, would prefer frankly not to have to do anything on some of these debt and deficit problems. if you look at the numbers, then medicare in particular, will run out of money and we will not be able to sustain that program, no matter how much taxes go up. i mean it's not an option for us to just sit by and do nothing. >> that was president obama in the summer of 2011 speaking the hard truths about entitlements. it did not exactly play well for him then and he's been largely quiet on the issue since, perhaps because for both parties talk of cutting social security and medicare hurts a lot. >> there's a pain point that democrats have to reach as well. it's not just republicans. that both sides have to be able to get to the end of this things and say, yes, the president won re-election but there is nobody that gets away with this thing without feeling pain. >> and there are some on the left who hope to get through this without having to go under the knife. adam green, co-founder of the progressive change campaign says -- yesterday on abc's "this week" congressman keith el
. we know we cannot deal with a serious deficit problem in this country as well as meeting our obligation to americans as well as making sure we protect the middle class. so he's put out a serious proposal of revenues and spending cuts and economic growth that does strengthen the middle class and get that economic growth. that's perfectly good starting point. the fact that speaker boehner rejected that, we're in a tough spot right now. what the republican leadership in the house has to do is say look here's what we want to do, here's what we believe we should do. they have to understand that the president won, the democrats gained seats in the house and the senate. the american people have said find that common ground, the beginning of that common ground is make sure we protect the tax cuts for the middle class. make sure we don't hurt the fragile economic recovery in the short term and let's deal with protecting medicare and deficit reduction for the long term. >> there's a piece in the "new york times" talking about the president's new negotiate i want aing style. it said mr
in a deficit talk is simple. it saves money. the keizer family foundation estimates that when it's all said and done, the government could save $5.7 billion in the first year of that plan. but those 65 and 66-year-olds they don't disappear. they are still going to be here and they are even going to get sick sometimes, which means the savings we'd see by kicking them off medicare rolls will pop back up in the economy. it's not pure savings, it's a cost shift. first and foremost, you're going to see increased costs for seniors who will have to find another health insurer since medicare is huge and uses its bargaining power to pay less by quite a bit. the seniors turning to private insurance will have to pay more for the same coverage. 3.7 billion more in the first year of the policy. for those 65 and 66 years old who are eligible for medicaid, states will have to pick up some of that tab. so three-quarters of a billion dollars will pick up that tab, we think. then there are the employers. many of the ineligible will turn to their employers. that will increase the health care costs of companie
for the fanel to advance a deal with democrats to cut deficits but -- >> grover norquist drowns himself in a bathtub. after he hears that. >> he made me do it. >> stephanie: two of the republicans that vote most often against boehner. boehner is trying to control his caucus. >> i'll be really surprised -- >> stephanie: these two guys, whatever their names are they said despite sweeping changes to medicare and medicaid, paul ryan's budget didn't make deep enough cuts to entitlement. those guys. yeah, that wasn't quite mean enough. [ applause ] >> i would be surprised if boehner kept his leadership position in the next congress. >> stephanie: really? >> yeah. because he's not -- >> stephanie: i picture eric cantor rubbing his hands together like snidely whiplash. >> he can't keep the caucus together. the republicans are famous for staying together. he can't keep them together. >> flabbergasted! >> that's doing a bad job. >> stephanie: he's flabbergasted at his own caucus. [mumbling] >> stephanie: by the way doesn't
the business community views this deficit thing as the biggest problem that we can solve that we need to solve. there's something called a campaign to fix the debt, which i'm on the steering committee, 120 leading ceos from everything from general electric to jpmorgan on down. really committed to doing something and accepting the idea that revenues have to go up, not ideological about how, but most of all, wanting a big $4 trillion package. and so they have become, in effect, allies of the president. they're really trying to get to the same place. at some point there may be differences over how much entitlements, how much this or that, but right now their interests are aligned, and they both agreed to be friends again. and so they've spent a stream of business ceos into the white house. the president -- yesterday the business roundtable and gave a very warm and accommodating speech. and they are comrades in arms, the least for the time being. >> willie, what a big difference from what we heard from business leaders for the first four years. this is a pretty dramatic shift. >> or even just a fe
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 66 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)